And Now The Case Against Airport Body Scanners

Damn the underwear bomber!

First, he ruins airport security lines. And I love how the government refers to them as ‘check points’. Yup, we are now officially slaves. The old Soviet Union had check points. Iraq and Afghanistan have check points. Go to TSA’s website, and you’ll see the word ‘check point’ all over their pages. And while I’m on my rant, why the hell is it that http://tsa.gov doesn’t work? You actually have to include the www. Could they not fix their DNS record?

But most importantly, he has ruined our culinary experiences. According to the Wall Street Journal, the increased use of body scanners at airports has resulted in an alarming discovery. It turns out that many chefs smuggle quality salami, prosciutto and headcheese in their pants as they travel from Europe to the US. → source

Yum!

I think I’ll have a prosciutto and brie sandwich for lunch tomorrow. Email or comment if you want to join me.

One last side-note. Have you noticed that recent pictures of terrorists resemble those prepared for Social Networking sites? They all have new-age poses and slight sideway alignment. When did that trend start?

Accidental (NOT!) Space Collision Of Satellites? Yeah, Right!

I haven’t been blogging too much recently because there’s just nothing good to blog about.

The recent crash of space satellites, however, has precipitated a deluge of conspiracy theories. Anyone who knows me is well aware that I’m not a conspiracy nut, but this is just too good. I’ve been skimming the blogs and here’s what I’ve been able to piece together from the collective. 

By now, we have all heard about the space collision of two satellites on Tuesday, 2/10/09. An American communications satellite and a defunct Russian  cosmos orbiter collided over northern Siberia causing over 1,200 new pieces of space junk. The Russian orbitor was presumably not maneuverable. The American satellite was apparently fully functional and able to execute evasive maneuvers, thus avoiding a collision if warned in advance.

The Russians blamed NASA for failing to warn of the impending collision, and NASA in turn put the blame on the Air Force. On the surface, this incident appears to be a case of error – human or computerized warning systems. But consider the following theory. 

First, the Russian government has not stated anything specific about the state of its orbitor. All citations of defunct status of that orbitor have originated from the news media. 

Second, the American communications satellite belongs to the Iridium Corporation. Remember them? In the 90s, they had a good idea, but a bad product. Their plan was to introduce a ‘satellite’ mobile phone that would work anyplace on earth. They launched a number of satellites into orbit to service the phones. But when they introduced the actual phone unit, they attracted no ‘sane’ buyers. For the phones to properly communicate with satellites, they had to engage an antenna that resembled a fishing rod. Not practical.

Third, the Iridium Corporation has leased their satellites, in part, to the U.S. Department of Defense. In fact, Iridium executive board includes Tom Ridge, former U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security.

Fourth, Iridium communication satellites are capable of altering course in order to avoid collision with other space objects. In fact, they have performed evasive maneuvers (by some accounts) 7 times in the past 10 or so years.

So. consider this. It is not too far-fetched to think that the Russian orbitor, rather than being defunct, was in fact a fully operational spy satellite. The U.S. Department of Defense, through its connection with Iridium Corporation via Tom Ridge, decided to take out the Russian spy orbitor. Of course, the Russians had no choice but to helplessly watch their spy satellite break into pieces because a “defunct’ satellite is not maneuverable.

I like it. If this is true, score one for the Americans.

I have not cited any sources here. I got this information from many different news articles and blogs. Google it!

Homeland Un-Security’s New Counter-Un-Intelligence Division

Source: Wikipedia

Here’s yet another reason why our intelligence agencies as well as our government continue to fail us. Recently, the Department of Homeland Security created a new Counterintelligence division charged with increasing “counterspying efforts across all agencies” and raising “the awareness of intelligence vulnerabilities in private industry and in protecting government secrets”. → source

That sound like a great plan. What’s the issue, you may ask? Michael Chertoff, the Homeland Security Secretary, has evidently found it necessary to educate the employees of this division in common-sense security matters. In an internal memo, Chertoff warns employees they should suspect espionage if:

1. Someone asks an employee for classified and sensitive information or access to systems.
2. Someone asks an employee traveling overseas to bring back an envelope or package.
3. An employee has regular contact with a person suspected of being part of a foreign intelligence service, terrorist group or foreign criminal enterprise.
4. Someone makes a request that makes a department employee uncomfortable or compromised.
5. A department employee has a personal relationship with a foreigner that seems suspicious.
6. There is suspicious behavior with a foreigner inside or outside the department.

Well, I feel much better about the security of our nation. Don’t you?!

Newt Gingrich: Confused? Deceitful? Communist? Un-American? Irrelevant? You Decide.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting trust from the people in the form of “giving up liberties” to the government is oxymoronic.
If you do not greatly value your sacred gift of individual liberties granted to you through the suffering endured by the early settlers, the unquestionable vision of and sacrifice by our founding fathers, and the many lives lost in wars we have fought, you truly do not deserve the freedom that America offers. As such, Mr. Gingrich is proving himself increasingly irrelevant in the arena of governing the people. His time, it appears, has come and gone.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________

During a visit to Drew University in New Jersey on April 17, former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich was asked how the government could justify stripping rights from Americans in such pieces of legislation as the Patriot Act. Gingrich responded “If there’s a threat, you have a right to defend society . . . People will give up all their liberties to avoid that level of threat.“

Wow, where do I begin?!

First, since when are Republicans willing to relinquish more control to the government? Not a day goes by that I don’t hear Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, Shawn Hannity, Brit Hume, or any other prominent conservative personality tout the idea of ‘less government’. There is even a conservative website for it: lessgovernment.org. When was the last time you heard a liberal advocate less government? Generally, it doesn’t happen very often. Gingrich is unable to sell the idea of citizens giving up their liberties even to his own party. Have we forgotten that America was founded upon rebellion against the government of England? Who among us can deny that Communism and Fascism indeed thrived upon encroachment on and sacrifice of individual freedoms and liberties?

Second, as Think Progress and other media outlets including MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann have pointed out, Gingrich’s comment sharply contradicts the views of Benjamin Franklin (Gingrich’s own hero) who strongly rejected this notion by saying “Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” I have included other relevant quotes at the end of this post.

Expecting trust from the people in the form of “giving up liberties” to the government is oxymoronic. It is certainly un-becoming of a prominent Republican politician who carried a copy of “Contract with America” in his pocket for years. As a side note, you won’t find a reference to Contract with America on conservapedia.com. Did the Republican party do away with it? No contract; hence, no liberty?!

If you do not greatly value your sacred gift of individual liberties granted to you through the suffering endured by the early settlers, the unquestionable vision of and sacrifice by our Founding Fathers, and the many lives lost in wars we have fought, you truly do not deserve the freedom that America offers. As such, Mr. Gingrich is proving himself increasingly irrelevant in the arena of governing the people. His time, it appears, has come and gone.

Leave me a well-thought out comment if you feel differently.
=================================================================

Notable Quotes – sources are actionamerica.org, http://www.dojgov.net/Liberty_Watch.htm, and other conservative portals:

“I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it.”
— Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Archibald Stuart – 1791)

“Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
— Wendell Phillips (speech in Boston, Massachusetts, January 28, 1852, citing Thomas Jefferson, though it has also been attributed to Patrick Henry)

“When governments fear the people there is liberty. When the people fear the government there is tyranny.”
— Thomas Jefferson (attributed to Jefferson, by his contemporaries)

“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
— Benjamin Franklin (on the title page of An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania – 1759)

“… rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our own will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law,’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual”
— Thomas Jefferson (Letter to Isaac H. Tiffany – 1819)

 “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves.”  William Pitt in the House of Commons November 18, 1783

“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
— James Madison (attributed to Madison, by his contemporaries)

“Government is not reason; it is not eloquence. It is force. And force, like fire, is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.”  George Washington

“I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! ”
— Patrick Henry, March 23, 1775

“What I am describing now is a plan and hope for the long term — the march of freedom and democracy which will leave Marxism-Leninism on the ash heap of history as it has left other tyrannies which stifle the freedom and muzzle the self-expression of the people.”
— President Ronald Reagan speaking to the British House of Commons at the Palace of Westminster